nature on the supply of oil. if i'm to sort of narrow my approach to economically sound issues, and yes, we have taken it to account the kind of shocks the could apply to economies if and when, which i hope is never, the price of oil and the price of energy was to skyrocket more than it is at the moment. but you could take pretty much any area of the world where there are latin complex, not that want to minimize iran clearly, but all such conflicts could themselves entail economic consequences that we have to be mindful of when we model. i don't want to sort of list those parts of the world where conflicts could arise and would have consequences, but this is, you know, as beckett used to

say, this is life and his no cure for that. [laughter] >> next question. >> hello, thank you for your talk this morning. i'm with china centric television in washington, d.c. and my question is regarding china but in relation to the global financial crisis, what policy decisions and actions which are like to see from china in the coming months? >> i think policy decisions have been announced already very much so. i'll distinguish between short-term and medium-term. short term there's an announcement of stimulus that apparently gives towards yet more for structure projects, more public spending, some financing of sne but not particularly in five years. i think it goes in the right direction. less monetary tightening as well and stimulus.

but in the medium term, what certainly is called for quite a lot by the two the new leaders is a model of growth that is more geared towards, or rather fueled by consumption by the domestic market growth rather than growth of export towards other countries. you will argue that this is a change that is induced by the external circumstances. china thinks about it, and looks at its interior market to actually have the degree and level of growth that is necessary to commune, number never one to keep people in place in abuja, the people. this is a good development that certainly we welcome and look forward in terms of action. i think to raise consumption come it's not just a magic bullet. it's also looking after people's

expectations, what kind of social security system is place, what kind of pension schemes will be a double, how reliable is all that. so it takes a complex set of -- to encourage that domestic market consumption led growth. >> since china has come up let me ask you a related question. having nothing to do with the exchange rate. >> you wrote about it. >> i was struck by a comment you made in your interview with the imf survey on friday. where you said, and i quote, asia has been a fantastic partnership for the imf. now, i like that because it's kind of a conventional wisdom that asia was not so happy with the imf ever since the asian crisis. indeed, that the asian for creating their own regional financial mechanism, perhaps in some point to rival the imf. so i was struck and very encouraged by the state.

i would like to ask you to elaborate on the. >> i would be very happy to do that. and i think the legacy of what's happened in asia a decade ago was a mixture of resistance, frustration, stigma, reluctance to partner with. and i think a lot of it is fading away. i was in indonesia, i was in thailand right after the meeting visiting other asian countries. i really see that as updating. it's also may be induced a little bit by circumstance but those questions are doing a lot better. they went through a terrible, terrible time, including with us trying to help, but now they are faring a lot better than advanced economies and they're not overly concerned about yet been in difficulty.

so i think it's fading, and i see proof of that in the willingness of those countries to actually contribute funding to the imf by way of bilateral loans. the first, apart from the e.u. area members, but the first country to come up with significant funds in terms of bilateral borrowing was japan. they brought in $60 billion, and when they see the likes of indonesia, malaysia, singapore, thailand contribute as well, it shows that they trust institution. i hope it proves my point that this is a slight resistance is fading. now, you mentioned the arrangement. and i think that's a very interesting development that i'm not afraid of, which i think is welcomed because sometimes you need an association of lenders

and an association of finances to help through, as we currently see in europe, for instance. i don't see the arrangement as being in competition with the imf. and to be frank, i think that the independence of the imf being above and beyond the bickering and the agreement of the territorial nature sometimes is actually a trump card for it to be engaged and involved in difficult circumstances. spent i will take the occasion for just a brief word of advertising. here at the institute we're launching a new series of lectures on the emerging markets. ever having the first of those this evening at 5:00. you are invited to the. it's going to be delivered by the former governor of the central bank of chile on how it

is that latin america has been able to come through the current crisis so successfully. one cannot quite say unscathed, but almost, as you make the point about asia as well. so there's a big new program your. we're starting it in and we would be happy for any of you who would like to join us on that occasion. >> i am from argentina. on the frame of what you said about surveillance i want to ask you a question about the argentina statistics. on monday, there was a lot of expectation that imf is going to make a declaration of censure because of the lack of progress and the quality of the statistics. but at the end they gave argentina more. i wanted to know what do you expect, do you think that in three months they can do what they didn't do up to now? and if not, what will happen in december? >> thank you.

you know, the quality of our analysis and the credibility that is associated with our work relies on the brink of our analysis and our economy, but also on the integrity of the date on which they base their modeling, calculation on all the rest of it. so i'm determined to make sure that we have the right data and where we have doubts, that would try to fill in the gaps, which is clear the case in the financial sector, we will continue to work together with them on the. so that's point number one. the quality and integrity of the is paramount to us. the argentinians like football. the real football. what is called soccer here, right? will come we have the choice between a yellow card or the red card.

and i trust in what people can achieve. sometimes it's the best. so it was a yellow card. it was not the decision of -- and they have three months to avoid the red card. but equally if, you do, no progress has been made, then the red card will be out. having said that, i was quite confident to see the argentine authorities reaction over the weekend, which -- [inaudible] to work cooperatively with us. we have been there. but we want to work. we will be on the other side of the table, and i hope we can avoid the red card, but if they dated is not appropriate, does not meet the standards, then all players are the same. argentinians alike, despite how good they are at soccer. >> thank you very much.

>> madam lagarde, i am from greece. >> i have seen you before. [laughter] >> i wanted to ask you, what is the status of the talks between -- [inaudible]. i was told the collapse talked, that there is a deadlock, that they are unreachable on differences of the measures. we really don't know what happened right now on the talks. and they are even saying that the is a budget shortfall of $20 billion but can you tell us what is going on? >> i would be very happy to tell you what i know. i was not in the room but what i can assure you as well is that our people, including our chief men on the ground are doing everything they can in order to help and assist, you know, to put greece back on track, okay?

i'm not finished but i'm going to address issues now. let me tell you how i see it. we don't only need 11.5 billion euros of cuts. we need a series of cuts and additional revenue. that's in order to come if you will, fill in the fiscal gap and help the country redress its public finance situation. that's number one. number two, we need some structural reforms that are in the interest of greece and the greek population. so that those who can work, the want to access markets, can actually do so. a lot of the professions in greece, for instance, are still closed up. there's been some progress. the drivers for instance, that has improved but a lot of the other professions still highly

protected and sort of lost amongst that have the benefit of the license. as an example of what needs to be done in terms of structural reform. a lot has been done in the labor market, for instance, it should be maintained, not damaged or destroyed. so the fiscal gap, structural reforms, and then you have the financing. because clearly as a result of macroeconomic situation, the major delay in privatization and, therefore, shortfall in proceeds from the privatization, to name only a few, and the limited revenue collection, there is a financing gap. especially if you factor in more time. so it's under three accounts that we need to make sure that the country can be back on track. and the greek debt will have to be addressed as part of the

equation. spent i'd like to ask a follow-up question, not ungreased per se, but on the role of the fun thing to do with crisis. and it's a hypothetical so you may prefer not to answer but let me ascii. there's been lots of comment on the role the fund has played in three program country. and there's been suggestions that is, against our hopes, new fund programs in europe are needed, it might take a different form. the role of the fund might be different. some have argued on one extreme that the fund should, in fact, be the major financial contributor in order to be the main levee, let fear of conditionality and to have a dominant role on the view that the fund would be better played to help the countries achieve needed adjustments. at the other extreme there are people who say the fund should

not be involved at all. this is up to the europeans. they are rich. they should pay for it. and for the fund to go in on a minority basis, as it has so far in the three countries, inherently limits ability to affect the outcome and puts it in a worst of all world. the question is, what lesson have you drawn from the role of the fund in the three programs so far that would inform any future possibilities of that type that might become necessary? >> you know there was a publication recently that sort of assessed and reviewed our role in relation to those european programs. and it is clear that it is of a different nature, because we are not in it alone. we are creating together with the european commission, that is

acting as request of the euro area finance ministers, and occasionally leaders, and with the european central bank, whose role in the process has clearly evolved over time and certainly evolved for the better. i can't, you know, say enough how good the decision made by the european central bank to ago was, with establish icing -- establishing an open door to a coordinated support to any member state. but, you know, your question is really about has the imf been able to do its job despite the circumstances. and when i look at the role we played in designing the program, whether it's an island in greece or in portugal, when i look at the role that we are playing monitoring those programs and

doing our review, and being right in the middle of controversies, as is often the case when we are involved, i think to myself, this is not vastly different. we are, in fact, in the appended, and we are not a yes man of the euro partners, now are we the yes man of the european central bank. we do our job as we should do our job. back in the winter, the chancellor asked me whether we were strong enough on our debt sustainability analysis, i had no fear in saying yes, absolutely. those are the numbers we stand for, and this is based on our analysis and it's not biased by any type of suggestions or influence of any kind. and i think we should just keep up and do that job as rigorously

and vigorously as we have. >> you mention angel remarks they need to slow the speed and a couple of countries picked to give you that you have prevailed on that, you will prevail on that? maybe there was some difference with your partner. >> fair enough, you are right. in program designed to there have been occasions, and that was certainly the case with spain. where we have no program. so our role is not on the, we are not in the hot seat if you will, because spain is not a country in the program. but we take views of the excessive -- [inaudible] on the forecast going forward, when we do article for. when we did the spanish article iv, which is this bilateral surveillance them when we did the financial sector assessment, we assessed on the basis of the

numbers that were given to us, the measures come in the forecast of deficit consideration that was expected, and we did say at the time that the timing seemed too short to us. pleased to see that this is being hurt. >> i'm jacob from the peterson institute. i guess this is sort of a follow-up question from the previous question about greece -- >> i saw you were taking notes. >> yes. my question really goes, you mention angel remarks that there should be less focus on targets rather than implement a measure. >> with respect to greece, if we go back to march and the process back then this year, there was a very specific target, maybe the long-term 127 was looming very large in that debate and you

just mentioned that the role of the debt to sustain the analysis worked. but this sort of de-emphasizing of targets, should it be interpreted as the debt sustainability target in next year you're saying is less relevant perhaps for the continuing fund intervention? and if so, does that mean that the long-term debt sustainability target is ultimately going to be achieved by the direct restructuring of the junior official sector participant, namely the euro area alone? and that this can be achieved at a state that may be more politically opportune for the governments in question in europe? it doesn't have to be basically settled by, say, later this month or october. >> when i was referring to measures rather than target, i was clearly focusing on fiscal consolidation. i was not referring to the debt

sustainability analysis, nor the debt arising that we set when we design a program. and what we have, we have. 120% in 2020 is still clearly the horizon that is set, to measure the efforts that need to be undertaken by them. but on the fiscal front, clearly, you know, when we recommend that revenues be increased i ask by, for instance, by improving the tax collection, by entering into the privatization program in due course and should have happened and has not happened, when some cuts have to be made in programs that are probably some of the most expensive in the hold eurozone, that's what i mean by sticking to the measures, implementing but not necessarily sticking to the targets in terms of primary deficit number.

>> okay, next. >> thank you, madam lagarde. and i am with china tv. my question is on the 2010 reform. you said it is now the authority can get the members needed for the quarter reform but for the governance reform, you still need more, at least about 10% to get it down. to some degree that is largely sitting on the united states. so won't imf put more pressure on the state u.s. congress to approve the change in the coming weeks and how confident are you that we're likely to see the completion of this reform before the annual meeting is at dover as the imf has plans? thanks. >> well, it's not just the united states. clearly there are others including energy 20 countries that has not yet ratified the reform that was committed to by the leaders in 2010.

so it's not the u.s. issue. everyone focuses on the us because the u.s. has a very sizable quota in the institution and is my largest member, my largest shareholder if you will. but the u.s. is not alone in that camp. i certainly hope that the u.s. authorities at large, including congress, with appreciate how needed u.s. leadership is and how needed the imf role is going forward in order to address not the sort of remote crisis around the world, but the indirect consequences of those remote crisis is around the world, including on the u.s. economy. i think if there's one thing that we are learning from all the multilateral surveillance work that we're doing, it's the degree of interconnectedness, of interdependence that all the economies have amongst themselves.

so it's -- >> how confident are you? >> i'm desperately confident. [laughter] >> thank you so much. >> maurice? >> morgan goldstein, peterson institute for international economics. managing director, thank you for one of the most interesting speech in discussing eurozone. you indicate -- >> i'm always cautious when i hear an english speaking person so interesting because it can be anything. >> well, you are quite right to. [laughter] but let me proceed anyway. >> all right. >> you indicated that discussing the eurozone, there was a need for a growth friendly measures, not just austerity. but outside of the ecb bond buying program, what are those growth friendly measures? why should we think that these will be sufficient to pull the eurozone out of recession?

when discussing the use fiscal cliff, you made a distinction, a helpful distinction between the medium-term need for strong fiscal consolidation, and the short-term need to avoid such a large fiscal contraction picture of their adverse growth contraction. why is there not a similar distinction at this point in the eurozone? and if not, why not? >> you certainly have to look at, and the eurozone you have 70 members but in the whole of europe you -- i will take two members outside and a come back to the. the other countries like sweden, for instance, sweden is struggling at a point 2% deficit of the month or a debt in range of 30% of gdp. a country like sweden can certainly take some positive

steps to stimulate its economy. you would agree with me, wouldn't you? >> with sweden, yes. >> okay. at the other end you have a country like, take the uk. a bit controversial with the united kingdom but the policies that have been put in place so far was highly restricted in the sense that they focus on cutting deficits. the point of time to make here is that you cannot just have a one size fits all throughout europe, let alone throughout the euro area. in the euro area situations as different as that of greece, for instance, with numbers well known, and the situation of germany, which is really getting close to a neutral deficit situation, although it still has quite a heavy debt burden. so first point is, it has to be

country specific even within the european union, and even more so within the eurozone. second, there are some growth conducive policies that can be put in place. let me take, for instance, the short-term. there aren't some budgetary reallocations that concert to be used in order to stimulate the job market. in order to give people training come in order to make sure that this system described by others before me actually doesn't apply to the european workforce. that's one example. second example which is more to do with the medium and long term is a series of structural reforms that need to be put in place in many of the euro area states. stronger competition authorities, more opening up of those professions, and not only increase, they are in other places as well. that's what i mean by growth conducive or growth friendly

measures that are both short-term for some, and more medium-term end result, and consequences, in effect, that can be taken out in terms of structural reform. >> a brief extension of that, what's your assessment at the fund of how long it will take those structural measures of the type you mentioned to pay off in terms of improving productivity, improving efficiency, and in stimulating positive growth? >> you know, i'm hard-pressed to give you an answer because this is not our core entity. on those issues the oecd for instance, is better equipped and has done more research work and we have. that conventional wisdom is such that it's more for the medium-term. the economies will have the benefit of those precious tangibly more any medium-term and in the short term.

i know that it has a slightly different view and some of his studies seem to point to more shorter-term than medium-term consequences. i think we're going to have, at least into markets, interesting results to watch. and that will be the case in spain and that will be the case in italy. where in both cases the labor market and the products and services market are in the process of being reform. but it's a tedious, cumbersome, complicated program because you cannot have legislation on the one hand but it doesn't come its impact on the judicial system and how the courts will actually apply the law, you know, for companies who actually decide this is going to invest in such country because the labor market is more flexible, maybe they're going to wait until they see whether the judicial system embarks on the same process and will not have very stringent

case load, which will counterbalance the positive effects of the legislative reform. >> when you see medium-term, do you mean two years, three years, five years of? >> yes, i was a two, three years years. >> okay, next. >> barbara matthews. thank you, madam lagarde, for an excellent presentation and going to go back to the question that jacob asked because there was another component that i think i and others might really appreciate the institute. you have made a robust case for program extension due to external, say exceptional circumstances or to ensure that program remains viable. and you've also stated today, to ago in cyprus we have to talk about the financing purchase program extension. usually that means haircuts, including for official sector holders, losses potentially for

official sector holders, new money either from the multilevel community such as the imf or individual creditors. and i know you will not comment on negotiations currently under way, but i'm wondering if you could provide some perspective on how to think about that combination of solutions, or are there other potential components that are being missed by the debate at the moment? because there is a lot of concerns and people go running off in one direction or another. if you can provide some perspective on how to think about the passage of potential solutions that one could consider. ..

>> and not always with a huge debt on its back. so it's the whole combination of matters that need to be addressed collectively by the members. >> thank you. >> well, this'll be the last question. >> dominic, thank you very much, madam chair, for your insightful remarks, interesting. i was wondering, i would like to draw your attention to the omt program that you have mentioned before which we have seen since the announcement of the ecb about introduction of this new program, italian and spanish yields have gone down. but, you know, some analysts

think that this may just reflect the expectation that both or either of these countries may be approaching the european authority's's and/or the imf, while some believe the effect of this dampening within yields might be a little bit more sustained. i would just like to ask you to elaborate, if possible. thank you. >> i'm not going to substitute members and their judgment and group of players in the way in which they're going to address issues. what i can see and, you know, i'm very pleased to see is that the tool box that the europeans have in order to face hardship is significantly improved as a result of the decision that was announced by the european central bank. and that's clearly something that was expected for which expectation was, um, arose by the announcement by the

president of the european central bank in london. and the fact that the tool box is there, soon capable of being operated given that the esm will be itself operating as of the 8th of november and capital contributions will be coming in, that in and of itself, i think, is a very strong message. >> madam managing director, we thank you enormously for your remarks. we wish you and your colleagues at the fund the best of success in tealing with all of -- in dealing with all of these daunting problems. we support you strongly and look forward to staying in close touch. thank you very much. good to see you. thank you very much. [applause] [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] >> the annenberg public policy center hosts a forum today on journalists' role in fact checking political rhetoric. it looks at a beginning of the electorate's understanding of political issues followed by panels of reporters who investigate claims made by campaigns and super pacs. live coverage begins at 9 a.m. eastern here on c-span2 and c-span.org. >> i want -- watch c-span, anytime something's going on, i want to watch c-span because they typically have the best,

most unbiased view of whatever's happening. if i want to get spun in a circle, i'll watch one of the other news organizations. so i love c-span. i'll watch 'em on tv or, you know, online. something's going on and i want to know what's happening, i always turn to c-span. i don't know that i have a favorite show. for me it's always anytime i knead -- need to know what's going on, i know c-span's going to have what's happening. >> c-span, created by america's cable companies in 979, brought to you as a public service by your television provider. >> in virginia two former governors are competing for the senate seat currently held by democrat jim webb. republican george allen and democrat tim kaine are polling within the statistical margin of error, and the cook political report rates the race as

toss-up. last week the candidates met for an hourlong debate moderated by "meet the press" host david gregory. >> moderator: and good afternoon. welcome to the virginia senatorial debate between democrat tim kaine and republican george allen. i'm david gregory, moderator of "meet the press," and moderator of today's debate. i want to quickly cover the rules of today's event. the debate will last one hour, and we'll begin with two-minute opening statements from each candidate. then our panelists and i will pose questions directly to the candidate. these questions are determined by the panelists, by us. they have not been received by the candidates or reviewed by the fairfax chamber. each candidate will have one minute and 30 seconds to respond, and the candidate answering fist will have an -- first will have an additional one-minute rebuttal. i like to be able to reserve the right to follow up with some questions as i see fit as the

moderator. we're going to conclude, by the way, with a two-minute closing statement. there is a timekeeper notifying candidates of the remaining time. i want to welcome our panelists. julie kerry who's been covering virginia politics for 20 years. ben pershing covers the d.c. maryland and virginia politics for the was post. he joined the post in 2008 after a decade at the capitol hill newspaper roll call. and we have aaron gilchrist, he attended virginia commonwealth university. let's introduce the candidates and hear their opening statements. in order in which the candidates will speak, i should say the order was determined by a coin toss earlier today. so, first, let's welcome former governor and the former chairman of the democratic national committee, tim kaine. [applause]

and next we welcome former golf and former senator -- former governor and former senator george allen. [applause] we will start, as i mentioned because of the doing cross, with governor kaine. kaine: thank you, david, and it's great to be back with the fairfax chamber of commerce. seven years ago we talked about transportation, and right outside this building there wasn't a rail to dulles being built. i was very proud to work on those with you in my time as governor. we talked about education. during my time as governor, we put in place the largest bond package to expand our higher ed

institutions in the history of the commonwealth, and now there's significant construction at both george mason and the northern virginia community college campuses and expanded preconsidered -- prekindergarten. we landed marquee companies hilton, volkswagen of north america, northrup gum monday announced they were coming to the neighborhood. we also won accolades as the best state for business every year of my four years as governor. i'm proud of those accomplishments, i'm proud that we did them together. but i'm especially proud that we did 'em in the midst of the worst e are session -- recession since the 1930s. today we're here because we have a senate to be fixed. we've got to fix congress to end gridlock that's blocking progress to important goals. we have to grow an economy, and to do it we level the playing field for small business, we

invest in infrastructure projects like rail to dulles, and we win the talent race that will enable us to outeducate, outinnovate and come up with a new energy, alternative energies, example, for tomorrow. we've got to fix the budget, and we'll talk, i hope, a good bit about that short-term sequester challenge, but the most important thing we have to do is put results over rhetoric, put partnership over partisanship and put substance over sound bites. our ideas is not the problem, it's our willingness to work together, and if i have the honor to serve as senator, i will govern as i have in the past and do that. thanks. >> moderator: thank you, governor. governor allen. allen: i remember all the accomplishments we've had working together true the years whether it's -- through the years whether it's convincing businesses to locate and create jobs here in fairfax or

reforming and investing in our schools and colleges and working with leaders in both parties to secure funding for key projects like dulles rail. i'm very grateful for that spirit of partnership. i also want to thank my friend, tim cain. we both -- tim kaine. we both love virginia, and at a time when so many people in our country feel that our country's on the wrong track and politics are so petty, i hope we can have a positive conversation here today that'll inspire people to the ideas and the opportunities that'll build a better future. susan and i have talked to tens of thousands of virginians. they still believe in the american dream, and they want to restore its promise. they want to make sure that they have access and their children have access to quality and affordable education so that young people can pursue their dreams. they want to unleash the enormous economic potential of our plentiful american energy resources. they want to reinvigorate the entrepreneurial spirit of our country with pro-job growth tax

policies, reasonable regulations so that job creators have the confidence and certainty to hire again. they want us to work together for real solutions. what they don't want, though, are politicians endangering hundreds of thousands of jobs here in northern virginia. virginia technology and defense jobs, and using them as pawns demand higher taxes, higher taxes for a budge deal. now, these are tough times, but out of this adversity, we can create a more confident, caring and prosperous america, and that's the positive agenda i look forward to discussing today, and the test is which approach is best for job creating virginia businesses. >> moderator: governors, thanks to both of you. i want to begin by talking about the role of government in virginia and the country. this is a high-profile senate race for the nation, certainly very important further commonwealth, and it's also

occurring in the shadow of the presidential debate. i'd like to ask you about the 47% that we heard about this week. governor romney, in some remarks that were taped at a fundraiser earlier this year, talked about how there's 47% of the country that does not pay federal income tax. he said that they believe they are victims who believe the government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, you name it. governor kaine, there's over a million virginians who fall into the category of not paying a federal income tax, part of that 47%. what would you do about that? do you think that should change? and what do you think more generally about whether too many virginians, too many americans by extension are too dependent on government for basic needs in their lifesome. kaine: david, i heard those statements, and i -- you can say something off the cuff that you regret, but i really deeply disagree with the sentiment expressed by governor romney.

i don't meet virginians who think they're victims, and the notion that they need to have people take personal responsibility for them is, frankly, con desending and divisive. the last thing we need to do at this moment is to divide people one against each other. this nation is divided enough, and we're wedged apart enough. we ought to be pulling people together. i think that as we talk about these long-term issues of the country's fiscal policy, we've got to have shared sacrifice. everybody has to be in the game if we're going to fix our budget issues. and we have an excellent opportunity to start right now, because we've got an issue on the table now that's immediate, that is going to call upon congress and the president, and that is how do we deal with these year-end budget cuts. rather than divide virginians and divide americans, let's come together on them, and i have a simple and specific idea about how we can come together. we will let the bush tax cuts expire for people making more than $500,000. we will fix medicare so we can

negotiate to get were the prices -- better prices on prescription drugs. we will let the tax subsidies to the big five oil companies to expire. we then have to find by year end about $235 billion in savings over ten years. we can do that in the short or term -- >> moderator: on one point, do you believe everyone in virginia should pay something in federal income tax? cain cain well, everyone pays taxings. >> moderator: the federal income tax. kaine: i would be open to a proposal that would have some taxes for everyone, but many of the 47% that governor romney was going after pay a higher percentage of their income than taxes than he does. >> moderator: governor allen, this is the standard bearer of the republican party, the leader of the republican party as the nominee of your party for the presidency. again, he believes that that 47% belief -- believe that they are victims. do you share that vision of america in and what would you do

as senator allen about the 47%? allen: the best indicator of what somebody will do in the future is their record in the past. my view is the best social program of all is a job. they're taking care of themselves and providing for their families. as governor, i worked with the democrat majority in the legislature, we cut taxes, made virginia much more business-friendly and more than 300,000 net new jobs were created in the private sector. one of the other great successes we had while i was governor was welfare reform. we wanted to promote the work ethic and lift people out of poverty and have the dignity of a job. i remember here in fairfax county having a press conference where we had a competition between domino's pizza and pizza hut on who could hire the most folks on. we had the press conference, and a reporter somewhat insulted a woman, and he said something to the effect that, well, what kind

of job is this, making pizzas? well, the owner of that franchise said how do you think i started? i started delivering pizzas, now i have several fran theses. then the mother stood up and said, i think it's good for my daughter to see her mother working. that's the dignity of work. it's a wonderful moment. and that's what we should be aspiring to, is make sure that everyone does have that opportunity to compete and succeed. i want to see people keep more of what they earn. we need to have the policies that don't increase taxes on people, but decrease them, and tim's got a different point of view, and that is one where he was trying to raise taxes on people earning -- >> moderator: all right. we're going to get to that, governor. i want to get back, respectfully, to my question. it was very specific. what the standard bearer of the republican party said. he said that 47% of americans are too dependent on government, they see themselves as victims. do you share that vision of america? and what specifically would you do to deal with that 47%?

allen: as i stated in the beginning, david, the best social program of all is a job. how do you provide more job opportunities for people? it's by -- >> moderator: you think nearly half the country see themselves as victims because they're too -- allen: no, i look very positively -- >> moderator: so you would part company on governor romney on this point. allen: excuse me? >> moderator: would you disagree with governor romney? allen: our responsibility as leaders, as public servants is to make sure this is a cup where -- this is a country where everyone has the opportunity to compete, succeed and pursue their dreams. and so the way i look at it, and i'll expand on it later, i suppose, you look at the records. who has created more opportunities? i mentioned welfare reform. those were folks who were down and out and temporarily needed help, and we want to help folks who are able-minded,

able-bodied, even folks who are disabled want to work. i think that's one of the great characteristics of all americans, and they don't look at themselves as victims. they want a government that reflects their values and gives them the opportunity to reach their aspirations and be that role model for their -- >> moderator: all right, governor kaine, take a moment for rebuttal. kaine: i don't think the question of whether governor romney's statements you agree with them or disagree with them is hard. it's very straightforward. they were divisive comments, and we're a state that's seen too muchty vice politics. one of the things i'm proud about with this commonwealth is i really see a tremendous effort to turn our back on the divisive politics of the past. my wife's with me, her dad turned the states back on segregation and integrated the public schools because he said it was past time for virginia to have an aristocracy of merit. that's what he said in his

inaugural speech. and this generation of virginians has rejected what was that speech. the sentiment is one that i think virginians do not agree with, and i'm very thankful that they don't. >> moderator: governor -- go ahead, i'm sorry. kaine: now, let's prove we can come together and not be divisive, let's come together on resolving the short-term fiscal challenge that can create problems for our state. >> moderator: perfect segway, governor. to my colleague, julie. >> moderator: governor allen, as you know, one of the issues that looms largest in virginia right now is the prospect of losing 200,000 defense-related job, coming from the $500 billion in defense cuts that starts to take effect on january 2nd. averting those cuts is going to require compromise and a

different kind of deficit reduction plan. given all those virginia jobs at stake, how can you continue to say no to any type of tax and revenue increase even if it is paired with a greater degree of spending cuts? allen: well, there's a lot of things that can be done to get our fiscal house in order in washington. i opposed this deal last summer because i saw this as being another example of washington leaders not making decisions, pushing off decisions to yet another commission which if it failed, and it did, you'd have these devastating cuts to the paramount responsibility of the federal government which is national defense as well as endangering so many -- now it's shown to be well other 200,000 technology and defense jobs here in virginia. what we need to do, in my view s repeal and replace obamacare. that will save over a trillion dollars in spending, and that's harmful for business. i think we ought to cut out and look at places where there's

redun can she in government -- redundancy in government. i think we ought to embrace the ideas that'll come from federal government employees and reward them with bonuses for cost-saving ideas. and the long-term solution is not these band-aids, but a balanced budget amendment. now, tim is on the side -- he said in the last debate that this was the right thing to do. now he comes up with a plan, he says. well, tim, i'd ask you on your plan, have you done a credible analysis of the impact on jobs in this country op your plan? if so, who did the analysis and what did it show? >> moderator: go ahead, governor kaine. kaine: i do have a plan, and the plan is a compromise, and it's specific unlike anything i just heard in the last 90 seconds. we've got to deal with a trillion dollars in potential sequester -- >> [inaudible] kaine: let's do three things. george allen voted for tax cuts when he was senator, and he voted for them to be temporary

for the reason was if you made them permanent, you'd bust the deficit. it's time to let those tax cuts expire for those who make more than $500,000. if the tax cuts go back to where they were before, we were in the longest economic expansion in the history of the united states. that will produce $500 billion in revenue. fix medicare. allow negotiation for prescription drug prices, something that george voted against when he was in the senate. that will save $240 billion over ten years. and finally, take away subsidies from the big five oil companies. they're incredibly profitable, that's great, but they don't need our help. that'll save $24 billion over ten years. what you then end up with is not a trillion dollar problem, you end up with a $235 billion problem. over ten years you can find that savings. after being a big spender as a senator, last year in august of 2011, george countenanced default for the nation. he spoke out against the fairfax

chamber and governor mcdonnell and congressman cantor, and now he's saying, oh, wait a minute, now we can't make cuts. he's on more sides of this than a rubik's cube. allen: tim, i guess you did not do an analysis of what your so-called plan would do to jobs. i think before you ever propose anything, you ought to be taking into the impact on jobs and our economy. you talk about governor mcdonnell and eric cantor and republicans. what they did in may of this year is actually pass a measure through the house of representatives which would avert these devastating cuts to our national defense and jobs here in virginia. what has the senate done? absolutely nothing. they haven't passed a budget in three-and-a-half years. these are the folks as chairman of the democratic national committee that you went around campaigning for. you ought to start off with what

the house passed and then look at ideas like reforming our tax code, close loopholing. the proposal i have will create over 50000 jobs a year, and we ought to unleash our energy resources, and that could create over a million jobs across our country and get a trillion dollars in revenue to the federal government without raising taxes. get more revenue in, have a country more secure and improve people's quality of life. >> moderator: thank you, governors. let's move on to ben pershing from the washington post. >> moderator: both of you have endorsed the idea of a simpler tax code with fewer deductions. i wonder if you would entertain of getting rid of the deductions from charitable donations, and what specific deductions would you be able to eliminate? is cain cain sure, ben. it's the second step in the process. we have to solve the sequester

issue before year end, and i've put a specific plan on the table to do that. we then have the broader challenge of making reforms both on the revenue and spending sides. i know how to do it on the spending side. i reduced general fund budget when i was governor, cut $5 million out of the state budget and can go in and find targeted savings in the short term and long term. but on the revenue side, i do agree with the proposition, and it this is something that george and i are in general agreement, that the right thing to do to find revenue is to do a tax reform that broadens the base and includes more taxpayers along the lines of the question that david asked earlier, that fills in deductions and exclusions and then reduces the tax rates. you can do it, make it sitler so that businesses and families don't have to have a tax accountant to figure it out. i think the charitable and home mortgage interest deductions are incredibly important policies, and frankly, what i would favor

is not battling about each individual deduction, but instead looking at a proposal where there would be an aggregate total, an aggregate amount of deductions that you could claim. i think the battling about each individual deduction could take congress decades, but i think looking at a strategy -- and this is not a unique idea to me, others have advanced it -- a strategy of having aggregate, total deductions is actually more likely to work in finding that tax compromise going forward. allen: two separate tax codes that we have, one for businesses, one for vims. for individuals, what i'm advocating the freedom to choose flat tax. i think it would be unfair to take away deductions for people who have made investment decisions based upon the tax code, and to all of a sudden change it would be unfair. however, if people would like to have a more simple tax code with few deductions or no deductions, and they can fill it all out on

one sheet of paper, multiply it by whatever the tax rate is, let the taxpayers decide. this is an idea that i've advocated for many years, it's really what hong kong has done. and what they've found is many of the people in hong kong with the freedom to choose flat tax went to the more simple flat tax. for businesses, right now in our country our federal government imposes the worst in the world, 35% tax on job-creating businesses in our country. the international average is 25%. i'm advocating reducing it because -- to 20% because i think america should be better than average. doing that will help create over 500,000 jobs a year. that's an independent analysis. tim doesn't have an analysis of his jobs plan, and tim's view on taxes is one of always trying to increase taxes. but, folks, lower taxes create more jobs, greater opportunity, makes our country more competitive, and it's amazing to me that tim, who would raise taxes on people buying used cars

and folks earning as little as $17,000 a year, will then countenance putting in jeopardy the hundreds of thousands of virginia defense and technology jobs. and in my view the men and women in our armed forces should never be used as a political bargaining chip to raise tacks on job-creating small business businesses. >> moderator: governor kaine, would you, just to clarify, do that for everyone or just high-income earners? >> first, i'll just point out the last rhetoric about taking veterans hostage on economic issues, that's exactly the kind of name calling that we've got too much of in washington. we can debate policies, but that's the kind of name calling that we've seen too much in washington, and what's wrong with washington is not going to be fixed by more of that. now, back to the issue. george talks about his tax proposal. he was a u.s. senator. he was a senator for six years. during his time in the senate, his fiscal policies turned

massive surpluses into massive deficits. the federal deficit went up $16,000 every second george allen was a united states senator. voted to raise the debt ceiling four times, voted to raisehis own salary four times. now he's talking like the fiscal conservative, but his record as a senator says we can't afford to let him have another crack at it. with respect to the particular or question on the deductions, again, i think the right strategy is going to be some aggregated examines of deductions rather than trying to fight the entrenched interests on issue to issue. and you could have the amount or percentage of deductions vary by income, you could do it in this a way that the tax code set up already. but i think that's probably the most likely path -- >> moderator: all right, we're out of time on that answer. allen: may i have some time to rebut? >> moderator: sorry, not according to your rules. i'm following the time that you both agreed to, otherwise i would because i always like more

rather than less. let me go to eric gill crest of news 4. >> moderator: virginians are divided on whether they want the affordable care act to stay or go partly because it's so complex. do you want to completely get rid of the law as it stands and start over on health care reform from scratch, or would you favor some other method? allen: i'll answer your question and use the first part, though, to rebut some of the comments that tim made. first of all, tim talks about $16,000 of debt, now it's the spending in washington has gone up to $54,000 per second in spending. tim criticizes the tax cuts we passed. those tax cuts helped create seven million jobs in our country and averted a recession after the devastating attacks on our country on 9/11. so the ideas of who's fiscally responsible, who's going to create the most jobs, i think that our approach will clearly,

demonstrably improve job opportunities. now, on the health care tax law, that's also an impediment to jobs. i've heard from so many small business owners, i've heard from community hospitals that that this is so harmful to them. small businesses don't want to get over 50 employees. some will make their employees part time which makes it tough for those employees who will have to find another job to make ends meet. it is also a cost that some employers are going to drop their insurance and employees will lose it. now, i do think it ought to be repealed and replaced. there's a provision, some provisions are good in it. i think covering children up to age 26 on a parent's policy is a good idea especially since one-third of students graduating from college in this weak economy are having to move back home. i also think we ought to have permized, more -- personalized, more affordable health savings account. they're portable. people can take them from job to job. here with the northern virginia

technology council, folks are in three jobs before they're age 30. i also think small businesses, y'all ought to be able to band together across state lines and get more competition, more choice and affordable health care, and i also think we ought to allow the states to have greater flexibility in managing medicaid, and i think they'll do it much more efficiently. >> moderator: all right. kaine: well, i'll start where george started. the senate record was one where he put fiscal time bombs into the budget that are still going off today. unprecedented in american history. nobody has done that, and nobody, certainly, has cut taxes while you're trying to wage war. the decision to expand medicare without paying for it, unprecedented. and the decision to do these tax cuts and to persist in the notion that they should be made permanent when the cbo says they had to be temporary or bust the deficit would demonstrate that a

second term of george allen in the senate would be very similar to the first. the affordable care act. there have been 33 votes to repeal the affordable care act already in congress, and i think there was a lawsuit, too, that got a little bit of attention. the last thing we need to do as a nation on this issue or anything else is spend our time looking in the rearview mirror. we don't need to go back. george allen was in the u.s. senate, and the number of uninsured people went up by millions while he was there, and health insurance premiums went up by over 60% while he was there. we do not need to go backward. i'm glad to hear george acknowledge some positives about the bill, and what we need to do is battle for it largely around fixing costs to control them. this medicare idea that i put on the table is a way to find cost savings in medicare, to bring down health care costs in a way that will help the budget, help seniors and won't jeopardize the quality of the program. >> moderator: but, governor kaine, there are about six million americans who might want

to look in the rearview mirror if they look at the report from the congressional budget office just today indicating that that's the number of those who would face, in effect, a tax increase -- many in the middle class -- for failing to actually get health care as pursuant to the individual as thought out. kaine: that same group of people will have the ability to purchase influences on health exchanges, that same group of people have the ability to get free preventive care under medicare or prescription drug discounts under medicare. that same group of people can no longer be discriminated against because they're women and have that deemed a pre-existing condition. they're protected against insurance companies abusing them because of having a pre-existing condition and denying them coverage. there might be a cost, but the cost was already being borne, it was just people going to emergency rooms and seeking care and then shifting costs to the rest of us.

individual responsibility is not a bad, is not a bad principle. >> moderator: governor allen, as i give you a minute to respond to that, i have a basic -- allen: don't i get a minute and a half? >> moderator: according to the rules, you get a minute. i promise you -- kaine: give him an a for effort. >> moderator: we're taking time away from you as we debate it. allen: go ahead. >> moderator: are you committed to universal coughage? coverage? allen: there's so many things wrong with this current health care tax law. part of the way that in addition to adding a trillion dollars in spending over the next ten years, they're taking $700 million out of medicare. this is why seniors are so concerned about whether they'll have access to doctors, and many doctors i've heard from have said we're not going to take any more medicare patients.

have health care decisions being made by doctors and patients, not bureaucracies up in washington. and that's why health savings accounts are the way to go. for those of lower income, i would make it a reversible tax credit where people get coverage for major medical procedures, and by having it portable, it means if somebody moves from job to job, they don't have to worry about a pre-existing condition that they or somebody in their family may have. so, to me, me, that's the posite approach that puts people, doctors, patient, hospitals in the charge rather than washington. and to me, that would be a paradigm shift. the solution is not raiding over $700 billion from medicare which is a system that we do need to make solvent and right now is in very precarious shape. >> moderator: okay. we're going to take a quick break, we'll be right back after this. we'll continue now from our questioners from news 4, aaron gill crest. >> governor kaine, we're looking

for clarity. we understand that you support relationship equality under the law. in order for all relationships between couples to be equal, wouldn't all couples have to be allowed to get a marriage license? kaine: aaron, you know, as i get older, um, i've come to the conclusion that being for equality is never a bad thing. we don't make a mistake when we follow the basic constitutional prescription that everybody should be entitled to equal protection under law. my wife's here, and i'll just say that the relationship we've had for 28 years is something that i hope everyone would have; the ability to have a committed, long-term relationship where you celebrate the joys and you, you mourn the losses and the tribulations, b where you create family and a network of friends, where you build up a store of memories to sustain you into old age. i think everybody should be able

to have that kind of relationship regardless of their sexual orientation. i want everyone to be able to have it and not to have to hide it. i think it ought to be subject to being legally recognized and even legally celebrated, and so that's why i do believe -- and i've taken the position since i started the campaign, that relationships should be treated equally. equally under law. same legal rights and responsibilities. i would allow churches, as they do today, to continue to decide which relationships they recognize in the church. i would allow state legislatures to make the decision about whether they would title a same-sex relationship a marriage, a civil union or domestic partnership. but the test for me is whether the legal rights and responsibilities that someone else has, they should be able to have those same legal responsibilities and rights that i have. >> moderator: i just want to pin you down though. do you believe in gay marriage in the same way that president obama felt the need to clarify his stand, recognizing the institution of marriage as being

possible and, indeed, should even be legal between a man and a man and a woman and a woman? cain cain david, i'll go right to the end of my answer. i would let state legislatures because the rules and regulates about marriage have traditionally been state policy, i would let state legislators make the decision about whether they would accord that -- >> moderator: you're not prepared, you're not prepared -- kaine: let me finish. i would be fine if they did it and they labeled it marriage, civil union or domestic partnership. for me is test is, are people given the same legal rights and responsibilities regardless of their sexual orientation? i think legal equality should be the policy. >> moderator: governor allen. allen: i believe marriage should be between one man and one woman, and that's the definition i've supported. i don't believe in discrimination against people on account of their sexual preference. the way i've operated my senate

office as well. i look at people's capabilities, their skills, their willingness to be effective in advancing the ideas that i always feel are most important. and to me, the most important thing that somebody can do in public service is make sure people have job opportunities, and that's -- we were talking about the health care measure. you know, that health care measure is a real impediment to jobs. folks here in this audience whether you're a large business or small business, this health care tax law is an impediment for you growing your business. it's an added cost. i've heard from a small business other than, a woman, who said her husband works for a company with 30 employees. excuse me, 300 employees. and they were going to drop insurance. this is very disconcerting, and so that's why when one talks about what's the best social policies for our country, jobs. jobs are the most important aspect of it all, and i think the family is the most important institution in our society. but i think that we ought to be judging people by their

character, their competence and not by the color of their skin, their religion, their ethnicity or their sexual preferences. >> moderator: before i go back to governor kaine, governor allen, i want to follow up on a social issue which seems to be an issue for republicans generally. why do you think you poll so much better among men rather than women? the gender gap in a new poll favors your challenger by 14 points. is this a republican party problem with women? take 30 seconds if you would, sir. [laughter] allen: okay. i think we're going to do very well with men and women. and i think after this debate and people will listen to my approach and that of my opponent, my friend tim kaine's, women, mothers that i've talked to whether they're married or unmarried care about jobs and the economy. and if somebody is unmarried, they're working. this if they are married, they're working, they also may be caring about the future of their families, and right now 50% of young people graduating

from college argue they're unemployed or underemployed, so i think we're going to get a lot of support from men and women, and i think folks will get united behind constructive ideas that will help send a message to the world that america is open for business again with the right tax and regulatory and energy policies to get this country ascending again. >> moderator: governor kaine, your one-minute rebuttal. kaine: it's demeaning to suggest that these are just social and not economic issues. the status of a relationship, if someone can't have their relationship recognized? inability to get insurance, inability to get other kinds of benefits, less favorable tax treatment, that's an economic issue. with respect to women, if you force women to have an ultrasound procedure against their will and pay for it, that's an economic issue. if you deny women the opportunity because of personhood legislation to make constitutional choices even including whether to purchase contraception, that's an economic issue. when george allen was in

congress, he repeatedly voted against family medical leave act. he's supported the blunt amendment to enable employers to take away contraceptive coverage for their employees. these are women's issues, but they're bigger than that. they're family issues, and they're economic issue, and it's demeaning to suggest, oh, those are social issues, we need to talk about jobs. women are more than half of this economy, and we have to make the right policies about women if we're going to have the kind of autonomy that we want. >> moderator: julie carey from news 4. >> six years ago, governor allen, you lost a race that most people thought was yours to win. in large part because of an insult viewed as an ethnic slur. you apologized, but that still lingers in the minds of voters. what do you say to those who are still troubled about that moment, why should they give you a second cannes, and how did that incident change you as a

candidate and a person in allen: well, julie, and all of you here, i've stated on many occasions, that was a mistake. i never should have drawn that young man into the debate. he had a hard job to do following me around the commonwealth of virginia. losing is a humbling experience. i didn't want like liewgz. you learn sometimes much more from losing than you do from winning. one of the things that my father always taught me and anybody who was in sports would say you get knocked down, you get back up. ..

with that come with tax cuts and reducing the size of state government, over 300,000 net new jobs were created. tim tried to raise taxes by $4 billion. numbers of the general assembly had to balance the budget, tuition skyrocketed in virginia by over 30%. and over 100,000 jobs were lost in virginia during his four years. those are the two different approaches and i think ours is one that empowers and provides more of americans with greater opportunities to control their own destinies. i think the biggest question is as a thing about this election, is a look at the congress that is broken and it's broke because people won't work together. we don't have a shortage of ideas in this nation. we don't have a shortage of resources in this nation. what we seem to have a shortage

of is a willingness to compromise, find common ground and work together. george and i debated earlier inn the summer question was raised, and i pointed out look, we all make mistakes. in public life we make them in public view. but the sentiment that was a challenging one was the notion that this young man had to be welcome to the real america into the real virginia. that was the challenge. because again we've lived through a state, we know a lot of politics in the state over our time has been one that is separated people into real virginians or other virginians. and we've seen that this week at the national level. that sentiment is still out there. we're only going to solve the big problems balancing our budget, dealing with the new energy future, if we worked together. and george, you famously said when you were governor that you enjoyed knocking democrats -- you didn't say with a smile it.

he said similar things as a senator against secretary clinton, pushing the stop hillary campaign when you were chairman of the senate republican campaign committee. some of it might just be kind of sports or competitive rhetoric, but that's not what it's going to take to fix washington. we need more bridge builders. we need more people who want to listen and find common ground. that's the one thing we are missing in congress right now, and we've got to put people in place to have a demonstrated track record of being able to do it. >> moderator: tim gunn you pick out certain quotes from it, and let me share some quotes with other folks have said about our records. records of service to the "washington post" which really says anything good about republicans said this about my service in governor. quote, while some democrats in richmond may hold their applause and factor general assembly in fact, the fact is that governor

allen has been markedly successful in generating business investment in virginia. virginia education association said that our education budget was the best they've seen in a number of years. senators clinton and wyden and kerry, we worked together. they support you but they have publicly stated how we worked together on issues whether health screenings, newborn children or expanding access to broadband. and then when tim was taking office, here's what a newspaper said. quote, if tim kaine is looking for a role model, for his term as virginia's chief executive, george alan's term as governor was one of the most consequential in the 20th century, if this was citing our successes and welfare reform, the abolition of role, job creation and freezing tuition. and the champions of small business and job creators know my record and no tim, and the u.s. chamber of commerce and the nfib endorsed me. >> moderator: that's time, governor.

>> governor kaine, turning to libya, there's been reports in recent days suggesting the u.s. consulate in benghazi may not have enough security to spice mornings of heightened despair. you think the obama administration could've handled this situation better either before or after that attack? kaine: i don't know the details and we've got to study at ensure the answer to the question is yes. when something goes wrong there's always something you could have done better. en i was governor my darkest day was april of 2007 when there was a shooting at virginia tech. the most significant crime in the history of the state. and i just landed in japan on a trade mission and then i got right back on the plane and flew back. i spend time dealing with grieving family members in that community. and what i said from day one is we're going to put in place a panel of people with a broad expertise have no connection of virginia tech and we will have them turn it upside down to determine everything that could've been done different.

so we cn minimize the chance that anything like that will ever happen again. we can't prevent it but we can minimize the chance. we found a lot of things that could've been done better. things that might happen at any college campus. but it required us to make significant changes in the mental health laws, significant changes to stop focus -- changes to campus security. there were things that went wrong. we dug into them and we fixed them to the best of our ability. i'm sure there were things that went wrong that led to the death of this wonderful ambassador, and others, including a man who was just buried yesterday in winchester virginia. i'm sure there are things that went wrong. what the administration needs to do is dig into it as deep as they can, find everything that went wrong and then resolve that you will fix them so that our diplomatic personnel around the world can keep doing a good job they've been doing. >> is this a broader issue with the obama administration's response to the arab spring?

allen: in some regards, yes. let me first take a moment and commend tim as i have before in his leadership after the tragedy on april 16 at virginia tech. at the time, tim and all virginians united, learned from what went wrong and improved the safety of our colleges. and so tim i commend you want to infer that. insofar as national security, there are a lot of challenges facing us. we had an opportunity to be on the side of an uprising in iran several years ago. when people wanted a more free and just society in iran. and i just wish our president had said we are on the side of those who wanted to change about theocracy, that repression regime but a state so that reminded me of when -- pre-du-lac reset when ronald reagan called the soviet union the evil empire, that gave hard to the producers. we have the biggest threat i

think as iran, if iran gets nuclear weapons, that that needs to be prevented. you have worries about, particularly in syria, the chemical weapons stockpile. you have the attacks on embassies in libya and egypt and elsewhere around the world. this is exactly why it is so dangerous and so wrong to be playing these little games with our armed services. we need to be stored. we need a strong economy to have a strong national defense. but the last thing we ought to be doing is having these devastating cuts to our military readiness, and that's why what has to happen is responsible leadership, stop these devastating cuts, come together, come up with a cut that sets the pride -- the right priorities and make sure the men and women who are protecting our freedom and our elections here of the best armament, best equipment in making sure that we also have a good paying jobs in technology and defense here in virginia,

and not use them as a pawn to raise taxes on job creating businesses. kaine: let me go right to the last point. no one is talking about using military our veterans as pawns. i mean, i haven't heard that statement by anyone except george, kind of thrown that charge at me. and that's the kind of charge that you ought to be a little careful about. i take second to no one in appreciate the service of our folks in active service, and in military, i was governor in the middle of two wars. our virginia guard people, 15,000 deployed on the war of terror. i went to their homecomings, when tether deployment, went to the way, went to afghanistan to do so by the fact that all units are home. we have to figure a way to get to a result went on these budget issues a we don't hurt defense. i've laid out a pretty concrete plan for how we can in the short term make the fixes, avoid

sequester cuts we don't harm defense and we protect economy. that's not about taking anybody present. is trying to solve a problem. got to have some problem solvers innocent if we're going to get through this gridlock. >> moderator: i want to stun national security. that is the war on afghanistan, a decade plus now. the issue is that our troops are being targeted by afghan troops. every troops were trying to stand up so we can stand down. governor allen, i will begin with you. and we publish the mission and withdraw troops from afghanistan? if we do not have an afghan army sufficiently stood up, do we have to stay longer and till that is accomplished? one minute each. allen: first, i don't think is a good idea in the first place to let our enemies or our opponents know when we were leaving. that just didn't make sense. the men and women have served in afghanistan and are serving right now our heroic. their families are serving as well. i think we have given the afghan people in their regions and their provinces every

opportunity stand up and take control of their own destiny. there will be ways as our troops come home, and i think they come home with their heads high. i think unmanned aerial vehicles, drones and so forth, human intelligence will still be important. i think there are ways we can monitor that area precisely strike if there's any terrorist activity. not just there've also the the border area with pakistan. what's going on right now is just a reminder that the afghan people need to take control of their own destiny. americans have invested our treasure and even more, our blood and injuries, of solely folks have served there. and until afghanistan, if the afghan people don't stand up for themselves, we can't. >> moderator: governor kaine, one minute in response to. kaine: i will start by agreeing the last point. the u.s. can't be a guarantor. it has to be afghanis. and i think the mission of the

united states presence in afghanistan was completed with the death of bin laden and the essential a elimination of the top leadership and al qaeda. that's why we went into afghanistan. we didn't go into afghanistan to remake civil society. we went after 9/11 to get bin laden and al qaeda. the continuing -- so i'm glad we're now having completed that mission. we are now withdrawing troops from afghanistan. the challenge that i think we're going forward is very porous nature of the border between afghanistan and pakistan, a nuclear nation with a nuclear arsenal and the prospect of instability in that region potentially putting the nuclear arsenal at risk. i think that has to be sort of our primary focus as we move through the drawdown to make sure that we do all we can to keep the pakistani nuclear arsenal from ever getting into the hands of folks who would to other nations on. >> moderator: time flies when you're talking issues and we've reached the point for your closing statements. governor kaine, two minutes country thanks to david and a panelist and for the fairfax

chamber. i also want to thank george. we been competitors now for 17 months, both working pretty hard. our families working pretty hard and our teams working pretty hard. hard. while i would necessary say i take george allen as my role model on policy matters, because we disagree on a lot of things, i do remember when i started to get into statewide politics and right outside my neighborhood that i kind of viewed him as a role model in the vigor with which he campaigned. and the fact he enjoys camping the -- campaigning. we need a wash and clearly that is about results. last year in the aftermath of the debt debacle we got a bond downgrade and it was telling when you look at the reason that s&p downgraded america's credit. they didn't downgrade because they didn't like the mechanics of the deal. they downgraded it because they said to me people in the american leadership class were willing to use the debt c